 |
 |
Is there consideration of creating a microformat[1] for SRU results? That way, if Tony wanted to output xhtml /and/ there was a valid representation of SRU available (and parseable) in the document, both sides could win. It would be a rather cool feature and would eliminate the need for multiple interfaces by vendors. [1] http://microformats.org -Ross. On 4/26/06, Ashley Sanders <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Ray, > > > You're mixing schema of response with schema of records. You certainly > > could returns records in XHTML, but you can't return the response in > XHTML > > (and be SRU conformant.) > > Quite right. I think my brain must have gone awol yesterday. > > I was looking at XHTML Modularization the other day: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/ > > and was wondering if this does offer a way for a protocol > such as SRU to return a response as XHTML? A quote > from the page at the above url: > > "Modularization also allows for the extension of XHTML's layout and > presentation capabilities, using the extensibility of XML, without > breaking the XHTML standard. This development path provides a stable, > useful, and implementable framework for content developers and > publishers to manage the rapid pace of technological change on the Web." > > Another quote from elsewhere: > > "Add extensions to XHTML, using XML, without breaking the XHTML > standard." > > Which sounds to me like you can return something as XHTML and > include in it all the extra info needed to maintain the > SRU protocol and without clients having to screen scrape to get > at the data. Though I guess the result would be a radically > different protocol, unless XHTML Modularization is SOAP > compatible? > > Does anyone know much about XHTML Modularization? Could this allow > the development of a protocol that can satisfy both a human and > machine user? > > Ashley. > -- > Ashley Sanders [log in to unmask] > Copac http://copac.ac.uk A MIMAS Service funded by JISC > >